CH1 Now online for all membership

[filovirus]

22 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

It is interesting though, how rule-oriented, letter of the law, the church has become.  It's far more pharisaic then the Pharisees ever were.  I notice how often at Church, we hear the very types of challenges Pharisees, sadduccees and scribes offered to Jesus.  I wonder if the Church's intention is to shameless continue the pursuit of being more pharisaic then the Pharisees. 

The Pharisees had bigger issues than rules obedience. They would judge others on whether they were or were not obeying the law. That is why Jesus scolded them in Matthew chapter 19. Obeying the law was not wrong, the intent of their heart was wrong, as well as their hypocrisy when judging others.

[rockpond]

1 minute ago, HappyJackWagon said:

It's difficult for people to go to their bishop for council on issues like vasectomies when they don't have access to the handbook to know that they should go to the bishop to seek council on issues like vasectomies  

That's true.  But...

I'll confess - I knew what the handbook said and still didn't consult my bishop.  It wasn't necessary.

[HappyJackWagon]

1 minute ago, rockpond said:

That's true.  But...

I'll confess - I knew what the handbook said and still didn't consult my bishop.  It wasn't necessary.

I would dare say that there are many more men who know what is in the handbook, than women, simply because many men have held a calling at some point that gave them access. It seems that women have been impacted  more because they would never have access due to their callings. Therefore men are given more information about important issues such as expectations and questions for interviews as well as disciplinary definitions, reasons, and processes.

Hardly seems fair. What does the church benefit by keeping access to this handbook so limited?

[Amulek]

1 hour ago, Ginger Snaps said:

When I go to LDS.org and search for Church Handbook 1,  it comes up in what appears to be Danish, even when I search for it with English as a qualifier.   English is set as my default language in the upper right corner but it comes up in Danish every time.

Curious. I tried that as well. Searching for "Handbook 1" yields normal results, but searching for "Church Handbook 1" returns results in a foreign language. It would be funny if it were intentional, but that's probably another bug. I guess the web guys are just having an off day today. 

 

[blueglass]

I tried the link but it sends me to a web version of handbook2.  When I was on the high council I had to get a wikileaks pdf and run it through adobe acrobat OCR, because they would not let us have access.  When the policy change debacle unfolded while I was in the bishopric I had to get the text off a link on a news website because no one had the text yet on the online handbook1.  It was embarrassing to send a rogue copy of the hb1 policy change from John dehlin to the stake president for confirmation it was correct, when official channels of access were delayed.

Edited November 15, 2017 by blueglass

[hope_for_things]

11 minutes ago, blueglass said:

I tried the link but it sends me to a web version of handbook2.  When I was on the high council I had to get a wikileaks pdf and run it through adobe acrobat OCR, because they would not let us have access.  When the policy change debacle unfolded while I was in the bishopric I had to get the text off a link on a news website because no one had the text yet on the online handbook1.  It was embarrassing to send a rogue copy of the hb1 policy change from John dehlin to the stake president for confirmation it was correct, when official channels of access were delayed.

I can still access it, I think my browser is pulling up a cached version that I accessed earlier today.  When I copy the hyperlink into a different browser it redirects to the Handbook #2.  I guess someone made a mistake, they want to keep this secret after all.  

Secrets...... 

[stemelbow]

58 minutes ago, filovirus said:

The Pharisees had bigger issues than rules obedience. They would judge others on whether they were or were not obeying the law. That is why Jesus scolded them in Matthew chapter 19. Obeying the law was not wrong, the intent of their heart was wrong, as well as their hypocrisy when judging others.

uh....I'm not sure what you are objecting to.  Are you saying there is no judgment about whether others obey the law or not within the Church?  He seemed to really scold the Pharisees, from the little snippets we have, for offenses that are largely embraced within the Church, it seems to me. 

[ksfisher]

6 minutes ago, stemelbow said:

uh....I'm not sure what you are objecting to.  Are you saying there is no judgment about whether others obey the law or not within the Church?  He seemed to really scold the Pharisees, from the little snippets we have, for offenses that are largely embraced within the Church, it seems to me. 

Handbook 1 is instructions given to bishops and stake presidents.  Both of these calling, especially that of bishop, carry with it the responsibility to judge the actions of church members.  This responsibility is given to them by the Lord as part of their call.  It is both right and proper that the church provide guidance to bishops and stake presidents as they do their best to fulfill their calling.  Calling this "pharisaic" seems uncharitable, to say the least.

[stemelbow]

Just now, ksfisher said:

Handbook 1 is instructions given to bishops and stake presidents.  Both of these calling, especially that of bishop, carry with it the responsibility to judge the actions of church members.  This responsibility is given to them by the Lord as part of their call.  It is both right and proper that the church provide guidance to bishops and stake presidents as they do their best to fulfill their calling.  Calling this "pharisaic" seems uncharitable, to say the least.

I'm just striving to be accurate.  I'm not as on board as you on this.  I'm sure much like the Pharisees of old, many feel it is their responsibility to judge other's actions.  But that really wasn't my point anyway.  I pointed out how the letter of the law is often taken to an extreme in Mormonism.  I object, sir.  No offense to anyone.  I simply think the Church is wrong on this.  I dont' see it as helpful. 

[Scott Lloyd]

I've just learned from a highly reliable source that the accessibility of Handbook 1 was an error that has now been rectified.

 

[smac97]

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

It wasn't?

Nope, it wasn't.  The very fact that there is a "Handbook 2" available to the public presupposes a "Handbook 1."

By the way, it looks like the link in the OP no longer works (it re-directs to Handbook 2).

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

One definition of secret is "not meant to be known or seen by others".

Give me a break.

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

The handbook itself states:  “solely for use by general and local Church officers to administer the affairs of the Church. It should not be duplicated or given to any other persons.”

Yes.  I'm okay with that.  It's distribution list is limited.  But it's not a "secret" book.

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

The digital version remains accessible only to those in certain callings.

Let's see that distribution list:

• General Authorities, Area Seventies, members of general auxiliary presidencies, Church department heads, directors of temporal affairs (1 copy each)
• Temple presidency (4 copies)
• Mission presidency (3 copies)
• Stake or district presidency (3 copies)
• Stake or district clerk (1 file copy)
• Bishopric (3 copies)
• Branch president (1 copy)
• Ward or branch clerk (1 file copy)

There are about 23,174 wards and 7,219 branches in the Church (see here), so that works out to about 107,134 copies at the ward level.  There are 3,325 stakes and 542 districts (see previous link), so that's about 15,468 copies at the stake/district level.  There are presently 418 missions (1,254 copies) and 157 operating temples (628 copies).  I'm not sure how may "General Authorities, Area Seventies, members of general auxiliary presidencies, Church department heads, directors of temporal affairs" there are, so let's be conservative and say 250 copies for them.  That totals at least 124,734 copies of a book which you propose to describe as "secret."

Good luck with that.

1 hour ago, rockpond said:

I think this fits the definition of secret.

In a strained, tendentious, give-me-a-freakin'-break kind of way, yes.

Otherwise, no.

Thanks,

-Smac

[ksfisher]

14 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I've just learned from a highly reliable source that the accessibility of Handbook 1 was an error that has now been rectified.

 

I wonder what's going on.  The previous week Handbook 1 had disappeared from my Gospel Library though I still had access to it online.  Monday morning it reappeared in Gospel Library. 

[rongo]

3 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

I wonder what's going on.  The previous week Handbook 1 had disappeared from my Gospel Library though I still had access to it online.  Monday morning it reappeared in Gospel Library. 

Weird. My paper copy seems to have been just fine the whole time . . . 

[blueglass]

36 minutes ago, smac97 said:

 That totals at least 124,734 copies of a book which you propose to describe as "secret."

Good luck with that.

In a strained, tendentious, give-me-a-freakin'-break kind of way, yes.

Otherwise, no.

Thanks,

-Smac

Well at least 9 of the 124,734 copies are accessible by women.   That makes perfect sense right?

Edited November 15, 2017 by blueglass

[stemelbow]

6 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

I wonder what's going on.  The previous week Handbook 1 had disappeared from my Gospel Library though I still had access to it online.  Monday morning it reappeared in Gospel Library. 

Most likely the Spirit abandoned the content management guys and gals when they laughed a little too much.  Loud laughter can cause it, for sure. 

[Duncan]

Probably someone quit or something and left kind of mopy

[ksfisher]

11 minutes ago, rongo said:

Weird. My paper copy seems to have been just fine the whole time . . . 

I haven't touched my paper handbook copies in years. 

[hope_for_things]

33 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I've just learned from a highly reliable source that the accessibility of Handbook 1 was an error that has now been rectified.

 

Thanks for confirming, too bad, seemed like wishful thinking that this would become open for everyone to view. 

Secrecy restored! 

[rongo]

7 minutes ago, ksfisher said:

I haven't touched my paper handbook copies in years. 

And I don't have a smart phone, and looking up sections on the internet is annoying. I'm a paper book guy (scriptures, too!).

[bluebell]

46 minutes ago, Scott Lloyd said:

I've just learned from a highly reliable source that the accessibility of Handbook 1 was an error that has now been rectified.

 

Dang.  Has anyone ever explained why handbook 1 is kept from members except when they hold certain callings or they have permission from their bishop?

[rockpond]

37 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Nope, it wasn't.  The very fact that there is a "Handbook 2" available to the public presupposes a "Handbook 1."

By the way, it looks like the link in the OP no longer works (it re-directs to Handbook 2).

Give me a break.

Yes.  I'm okay with that.  It's distribution list is limited.  But it's not a "secret" book.

Let's see that distribution list:

• General Authorities, Area Seventies, members of general auxiliary presidencies, Church department heads, directors of temporal affairs (1 copy each)
• Temple presidency (4 copies)
• Mission presidency (3 copies)
• Stake or district presidency (3 copies)
• Stake or district clerk (1 file copy)
• Bishopric (3 copies)
• Branch president (1 copy)
• Ward or branch clerk (1 file copy)

There are about 23,174 wards and 7,219 branches in the Church (see here), so that works out to about 107,134 copies at the ward level.  There are 3,325 stakes and 542 districts (see previous link), so that's about 15,468 copies at the stake/district level.  There are presently 418 missions (1,254 copies) and 157 operating temples (628 copies).  I'm not sure how may "General Authorities, Area Seventies, members of general auxiliary presidencies, Church department heads, directors of temporal affairs" there are, so let's be conservative and say 250 copies for them.  That totals at least 124,734 copies of a book which you propose to describe as "secret."

Good luck with that.

In a strained, tendentious, give-me-a-freakin'-break kind of way, yes.

Otherwise, no.

Thanks,

-Smac

And it's distribution is controlled to prevent the other roughly 15,757,683 members from reading it.  While I agree that it is known that the book exists, I was stating that calling it "secret" isn't incorrect since, per your figures, less than 0.8% of members currently have access to it while the remaining 99.2% do not.

[bluebell]

51 minutes ago, smac97 said:

Nope, it wasn't.  The very fact that there is a "Handbook 2" available to the public presupposes a "Handbook 1."

By the way, it looks like the link in the OP no longer works (it re-directs to Handbook 2).

Give me a break.

Yes.  I'm okay with that.  It's distribution list is limited.  But it's not a "secret" book.

Let's see that distribution list:

• General Authorities, Area Seventies, members of general auxiliary presidencies, Church department heads, directors of temporal affairs (1 copy each)
• Temple presidency (4 copies)
• Mission presidency (3 copies)
• Stake or district presidency (3 copies)
• Stake or district clerk (1 file copy)
• Bishopric (3 copies)
• Branch president (1 copy)
• Ward or branch clerk (1 file copy)

There are about 23,174 wards and 7,219 branches in the Church (see here), so that works out to about 107,134 copies at the ward level.  There are 3,325 stakes and 542 districts (see previous link), so that's about 15,468 copies at the stake/district level.  There are presently 418 missions (1,254 copies) and 157 operating temples (628 copies).  I'm not sure how may "General Authorities, Area Seventies, members of general auxiliary presidencies, Church department heads, directors of temporal affairs" there are, so let's be conservative and say 250 copies for them.  That totals at least 124,734 copies of a book which you propose to describe as "secret."

Good luck with that.

In a strained, tendentious, give-me-a-freakin'-break kind of way, yes.

Otherwise, no.

Thanks,

-Smac

Any ideas why it's not available to members not in leadership positions, if it's not meant to be confidential?

Edited November 15, 2017 by bluebell

[CA Steve]

A very reliable source has told me that the CH1 isn't published because it is secret but because it is sacred.

 

[hope_for_things]

Here is the SL Trib take on the formerly secret and sacred to temporarily just sacred, back to secret and sacred again saga.  

http://www.sltrib.com/religion/local/2017/11/15/mormon-church-mistakenly-posts-guidelines-meant-exclusively-for-local-leaders-then-removes-them/

 

[Duncan]

I think at this point we need this